Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 04/19/2018 in all areas

  1. 9 points
    Hello everyone:wave: I'm from outer suburbs of Sydney....Hawkesbury. I have recently started my journey into getting my RPL... it's been my dream since I was 11yrs old. Getting ready to do my very first solo and I'm pretty nervous Looking forward to taking part in this forum. Cheers
  2. 6 points
    Hi All After a six and a half year hiatus I have returned not only to the Aircraft Pilots forum, but to the skies around Perth (well, around Bindoon anyway, YBHL). I have a bunch of questions, and was really not sure where to post given some are around training, some are around RA vs GA, some on medical etc, so I thought I'd just start here. Some quick background: First ever lesson was as a 46 year old in February 2010, aiming for PPL at Jandakot and starting out in C152's. Passed GFPT in October 2010, converted to C172's then flew only about 10 hours late 2010/early 2011 before moving my training to Bunbury in February 2102 for navigation and hopefully PPL. Did 3 dual navs and a solo before having a wrestle with CASA over the type of vision correction I use (a special type of contact lens). They wouldn't budge, I wouldn't budge, and I ended up shelving it with the prize in sight. (Even passed my PPL theory exam). I never thought it would be 6 and a half years until I got back in the air. But one day about 6 weeks ago, I looked into it again and started discovering how things had changed in GA & RA since 2012. So first I converted my GFPT to RPL (just because I could), and made the cutoff date of August 31 for a no-charge conversion with about a day to spare. Then I Googled 'flight training in perth'; clicked on a few links; made a few calls; and found myself going down the RAAus path. I had found that the cost of GA training was becoming prohibitive (for a man of my modest means), and that the cost of RA was very affordable. So I've embarked on a GA to RA conversion, flying J170's. I've had 4 hours covering off all the usual basics, plus stalls, some circuits, and FLWOP. It was just a little bit different from a Cessna, I can tell you! (although I'm sure many of you would know) but it came back to me quicker than I thought it would, although the stick vs yoke thing, with the throttle on the wrong side (tongue-in-cheek) took a little getting used to. So, hopefully not too far from getting an RA pilot certificate, then on to 'cross country' and my original dream of flying further afield. The best thing though, is it seems that there is a path from RA to GA, so if I wanted to switch back to GA, or do both, then I can. That's probably always been the case, but it seems so much clearer now. Anyhow this post is already way too long, so I'll post my questions later. Feeling a bit pumped about being back in the air. Cheers Mick
  3. 6 points
    Thank you Ian for putting us all in the picture . I know I speak for all of us here when I say Caitlin is an inspiration to us all and with your love and dedication she will not only make a full recovery , but shine in life in whatever she decides to undertake . Please accept my sincere thoughts of goodwill . David C
  4. 5 points
    Australia still is building mirages.
  5. 5 points
    I have seen thruster's do similar but not with the flags. Aussies are just not into flags like you guys.
  6. 5 points
  7. 4 points
    Comments on: Civil Aviation Legislation Amendment (Part 149) Regulations 2018 Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, and none of the following is reliable legal advice; If you want to know where you stand, get a copy of this legislation, and a copy of the Recreational Aviation Australia Limited Constitution and applicable documents to this legislation, and go see a specialist lawyer. These comments follow a quick skim of he legislation document, and are intended just for discussion, not as reference material, and may be varied after this date. Link to the Regulations: Civil Aviation Legislation Amendment (Part 149) Regulations 2018 The link shows the regulations have been through both Houses of Parliament, and have been signed off by the Governor-General, becoming law on July 14, 2018. The Austlii Federal Register of Legislation lists it as "In Force - Latest version - F2018L010030. On this basis, I'm leaving the effective date at July 14 in the comments on this post, HOWEVER, Please note Jim's comments #13. I don't have any reason to doubt him, so it could well be that the effective date moves out. Certainly if I was in the Senate I would be asking for the regulations to be torn up and a fresh start made. Comments (Clauses from the document are in Italics) In the draft stage these were known as CASA Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 Part 149, Part 149 fitting neatly on the end of the CASRs. It would be interesting to know why these regulations were separated from their logical place. As we know, in the mid 1980s, State and Federal governments became concerned about the potential cost to taxpayers of multiple, and large, public liability claims, saw themselves as soft target and began offloading liabilities. By far the most successful example of this was the State road authorities handing over registration of motor vehicles to motor vehicle dealers. Victoria closed down its Department of Labour and Industry almost overnight and stopped factory inspections, and the issuing of “tickets” for cranes, chains and machinery. Many sporting bodies no longer had legislation to comply with, so they established their own. However, by 1998 the State and Federal Ministers set out to address the rump of people who were not insuring themselves, or thought Industry standards and codes were “optional”, and we saw a rash of “Safety” legislation such as the Victoria’s Road Safety (Vehicles) Regulations 1999, which made some key Codes of Practice mandatory, and set penalties for non-compliance, It could be coincidence, but I suspect the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 Part 149 were intended to be part of that general tightening up of loose cannons, and it seems to read that way. Many members of this forum have complained about being subjected to more and more regulations, and I’ve kept reminding them that they were only just discovering the old regulations they should have been complying with all along. This is the big change; these are new regulations, and there will be a lot of them after the ASAO have realized their obligations and set to work catching up to July 14. That’s the date this legislation applies from, and prior to that date, your ASAO should have provided you with notification, and all the documents required by CASA. If the ASAO has failed to do this make a note of the date, particularly if you are involved in an accident or incident from July 14 until you are notified of the rules you have to follow. That may save you a lot of money. While ignorance of the law is not excuse, it helps if a law wasn’t in place when the accident occurred. Part 149 Approved Self Administering Aviation Organisations When governments set out to off load liability, the cleanest way to do this is to let industry and/or people run their own affairs, assume all risks and make their own codes of practice, benchmark standard and rules, to manage those risks, and assist Courts in deciding whether safe standards were being practiced when an accident occurred. Sometimes governments accidently re-assume risk; for example there is a world of difference between the word “Approved” which is used in this legislation and “Recognised” which is an arms length word when referring to a Self Administering body. 149.010 CASA may issue a Manual of Standards for this Part (a) Required to be prescribed by the Part 149 Manual of Standards (b) Necessary of convenient to be prescribed for carrying out of giving effect to this Part. If CASA do issue a Manual of standards, then what is the purpose of a Self Administering Organisation. Their Manual effectively imposes Government regulation all the way down to the Participants, so the government reassumes the risk 149.085 (b) The ASAO must comply with any direction given to the ASAO, or obligation imposed on the ASAO, by CASA under these regulations. Re-assumption of risk – effectively the directives and obligations are being imposed on members by the government body; the ASAO is not self- administering. Any error, confusion inadequacy etc. opens the government up to being a defendant. 149.110 (1) A change to an ASAO’s exposition must be approved by CASA under regulation 149.115 before the change is made. Re-assumption of risk; the ASAO is prevented from self-administering, becoming a superfluous cost to members. 149.120 (1) If CASA is satisfied that it is necessary in the interests of aviation safety, CASA may, by written notice given to an ASAO, direct the ASAO to change the ASAO’s exposition. Re-assumption of risk; the ASAO is prevented from self-administering. (2) CASA may, by written notice given to an ASAO, direct the ASAO to remove any of the key personnel of the ASAO from the person’s position. [subject to some CASA definitions] Re-assumption of risk; the ASAO is prevented from self-administering. 149.195 Organisation and Personnel Re-assumption of risk; the ASAO is prevented from self-administering. CASA is reserving the right to dictate the number and type of personnel. 149.205 Re-assumption of risk; the ASAO is prevented from self-administering. CASA is dictating qualifications, but not setting a minimum standard. 149.210 Re-assumption of risk; the ASAO is prevented from self-administering. CASA is dictating qualifications, but not setting a minimum standard. 149.270 Re-assumption of risk; the ASAO is prevented from self-administering. CASA is dictating the nature of an SMS, and so is legally responsible for any mistakes. 149.275 Re-assumption of risk; the ASAO is prevented from self-administering. 149.280 Re-assumption of risk; the ASAO is prevented from self-administering. 149.285 Re-assumption of risk; the ASAO is prevented from self-administering. 149.290 Re-assumption of risk; the ASAO is prevented from self-administering. The safer alternative, is some direction is being suggested, is to provide a set of Model Rules, which are not obligatory. This way, the government is responsible for every mistake. SUB PART 149F – Expositions (a) (i) For each of the ASAO’s key personnel, the following information: (e) A description of the ASAO’s Safety Management System required by regulation 149.270 (f) A description of the ASAO’s Audit and Surveillance system required by regulation 149.275 (g) the ASAO’s aviation administration and enforcement rules You’ll recall the howling down of Ed Herring when he tried to employ a person with SMS experience, to write a fully comprehensive SMS, and the subsequent SMS produced by RAA. (f) is really the compliance and enforcement policy which in my opinion threw all the legal responsibilities onto the CFIs for the students they signed off. Robust and Survivable policies and systems for (e), (f) and (g) needed to have been communicated to all members before July 14, so that members could be complying with them on July 14, when the first accidents and incidents under the new regulations could have been occurring. 149.345 An ASAO must not contravene a provision of the ASAO’s exposition This would be a reasonable example of a requirement on an ASAO (leaving out any conditions which CASA may have “required”). The way it reads is that the ASAO writes it’s exposition, then is required by law to live by it. 149.400 (1) An ASAO must not reject an application by a person for an authorization to undertake an activity administered by the ASAO on grounds other than the eligibility criteria set out in the ASAO’s aviation administration and enforcement rules. Where this conflicts with the ASAO’s Constitution, Special/Emergency meetings should have been held to ensure no conflict by July 14, or an urgent bulletin of intent to change should have been advised to members. The ASAO by now needs to have considered, and have rules in place for eligibility, including assessment of members with disabilities etc. which may not prevent them from flying. GENERAL A lot of Strict Liability penalty clauses for the ASAO. The standard of personnel required may result in a much higher salary bill. Exposition, or an ASAO means: (a) The set of documents approved by CASA under regulation 149.080 in relation to the ASAO, or: (b) If the set of documents is changed under regulation 149.115 or 149.120, or in accordance with the process mentioned in paragraph 149.340 (i) – the set of documents as changed. Hopefully all ASAO members have been quiet over the last few days reading their new ASAO documents and rules. From the members point of view, if the government has re-assumed legal liability in some clauses, that gives the member a powerful fellow defendant in the case of an accident, but a likely outcome is confusion. I’m not quite sure just how these regulations got through both houses of parliament, but no doubt there were extended periods of consultation where members could have made submissions, and local members of both houses could have been contacted. And remember, this is just my take on the new regulations; you are entitled to an entirely different view.
  8. 4 points
    Yep. I'm suffering from insufficient ignorance.
  9. 4 points
    We all have that when to flare problem. Only works when no one is watching. I hope you can manage through the issues, it is worth doing.
  10. 4 points
    There was finger poking too? Jeez CASA are really getting thorough with their checks!
This leaderboard is set to Melbourne/GMT+10:00